Bruce Sterling on making the Internet safe for freedom and art

which includes a fair deal in copyright, because the Internet is a machine for copying

As a creator, small label owner and occasional writer, I feel I’ve got a dog in this fight. Perhaps @doctorow and I disagree on what a fair deal in this case might be. Back when Lessig was trying to get some term limit reform action, I was hoping he would succeed. When he failed and the matter turned into what looked like whargarbl I was sad. When the Creative Commons license first got going I was thrilled as it solved a practical problem in that I wanted a clear way to differentiate between what I want to give away and what I want to sell.

The thing is that while the Internet does facilitate copying, I don’t see its existence as a causal reason for copyright reform at all. If anything the “machine for copying” aspect has been a net negative for me and this brings me to the meat of my comment.

It is a marvel of rhetoric and a tonic for those of us who are heartily sick of the trollies.

Must those who have different interests and understandings be trollies? @doctorow I don’t know if your upbringing included any “traditional” Jewish education or not, but when I read your positions on the matter of copyright in general and how you treat those you see as opponents I’m reminded of Beit Hillel vs Beit Shammai. Both sides of these debates are considered worthy of respect but in general part of why the rulings of Beit Hillel are considered to be correct is that they are respectful of the views they are countering.

Is it not possible that those who don’t see eye to eye with you are also worthy of your respect?